CT Was Luke's decision to face Vader in "The Empire Strikes Back" the wrong choice?

Of course, we all know how it played out: Luke fights Vader, he loses the battle, gets his hand cut off, learns Vader is his father, a burden which he is not yet ready to bear, and endangers himself as well as his friends. Clearly, it would have been better had he not gone. However, from Luke's perspective, and from a moral standpoint, was it wrong for Luke to go in attempt to save his friends?

Yoda told Luke that he was not ready to fight Vader and that, if he got killed, the entire Rebellion could fail. Basically, his advice was, "Let your friends die for the greater good." Which is the essentially the same thing he told Anakin when he foresaw Padme's death.

Yoda and Obi Wan clearly think Luke made the wrong choice in going to save his friends, and later Luke even apologizes for it. As far as I am concerned, however, Luke did the only thing he COULD have done. He would have been a pretty terrible person to let his friends die, even if he was risking his own life in doing so. A bit reckless and extremely risky, but nonetheless I think he made the RIGHT decision.

What do you all think?

 

it could have went worse than it did. i think he got lucky because of his friends, which is all the more reason why he went to save them. it was the hard road but not wrong or right in any stretch

 

The thing is, Yoda knew very well that force visions are hardly an exact science, and trying to intervene to do something about them can actually make the situation worse in some cases. As such, I don't think he was trying to be heartless when he told Luke to stay. From Yoda's perspective, here was an unprepared and not fully trained Jedi learner who couldn't control his own abilities, who now wants to go off and get in the fight based on visions that aren't giving him the full picture. As it turns out, nothing Luke did at Cloud City had any impact whatsoever in terms of helping his friends, and he was very fortunate to even make it out of there.

 

Ironically, facing Vader was really beneficial for Luke's training as well...kind of a trial by fire.

 

I'd say that Luke did save his friends, though not in the way he'd hoped, and that his actions ultimately led to both an Alliance victory and a personal victory.

The only reason Vader was keeping Luke's friends alive was as bait for a trap. Once Luke arrived at Bespin, Vader pretty much loses interest in them. Luke is his primary objective. Han had already been turned over to Fett, so Vader just has the others sent to the Executor. This provided Lando with the distraction he needed to spring the others and try to escape. Then, while Luke loses the duel, he gains important information that had been withheld from him, and gains a truer insight into the man behind the mask than Kenobi & Yoda were giving him. In fact, he's better able to deal with the truth than his mentors had thought. While he briefly falters, he manages to stay true to the Light Side, thus giving Anakin the chance to put aside his own flaws, toss Palpatine to his doom, and repent his crimes before his death. Ultimately, Luke helps save his father's soul, and that leads to the downfall of the Empire.

If Luke hadn't gone, I'd say everything falls apart. Vader, realizing his plan isn't working, decides to cut his losses: Chewie and Leia are publically executed for treason, dealing a serious blow to Alliance morale, and Threepio gets melted down for scrap. Luke finally faces Vader, but he's been taught Vader's lost and evil forever, so Luke kills Vader, who goes unredeemed to his death. Now, Luke must face Palpatine alone. Given that not even Yoda could defeat him, Palpatine proceeds to utterly crush Luke in battle. Even if Luke somehow manages to win, there's still Han to worry about. Waaaay down the road, once the Empire is sorted out, Luke finally goes to rescue Han and get him out of the carbonite. Han then proceeds to get a gun and shoot Luke for abandoning Chewie and Leia in the name of the "greater good".

I may be going against the tide here, but I think that by reusing both Vader's path ("Join me and rule the galaxy") and Kenobi & Yoda's path ("Let your friends die, then kill Vader without hesitation") and choosing his own course, Luke truly saved the day. It was difficult and painful, but it worked out in the end.

 

If Luke didn't face Vader in ESB, will he ever find out the truth? It's disturbing to think that he could have destroyed his father without knowing.

To the OP, in pragmatic sense it's a wrong choice.

 

It certainly was. Additionally, it was Luke's trial of the flesh if you take the Legends continuity into account.

There is really no right answer. Logically, Luke should have stayed behind to finish the training, but the Force works in mysterious ways. Ultimately, it was beneficial for Luke to face Vader and learn his identity.

 

No, that's not how it would go down. Luke would feel guilt over not going to rescue his friends and think it is his fault they died. No fortune cookie advice by Yoda can wipe that away. And this very guilt would be the chink in the armor that the Sith are best at exploiting. Luke would fall to the dark side and all would be lost.

 

YODA: "Unexpected this is and unfortunate."

LUKE: "Unfortunate that I know the truth?"

YODA: "No. Unfortunate that you rushed to face him. That incomplete was your training. Not ready for the burden, were you."

Yoda and Obi-wan would have told Luke when his training was completed.

 

I think that is was both right and wrong. I think it's great that he wanted to protect his friends and it helped him to test himself and understand himself better. It's wrong because he didn't listen to his Master but then again, it's Skywalker blood...

 

The novelization of Return of the Jedi even has Ben saying "I was going to tell you when you completed your training". Apparently, Yoda and Obi-Wan's logic is that Luke needed a clear and disciplined mind before finding out that his father is one of the most evil beings in the galaxy.

 

yes. he should have listened to yoda. although going set certain good things in motion it could have gone much worse. luke could have died or turned.

 

Both sides of the argument have their pros and cons. Ultimately, though, it worked out, and it's hard to argue with success. We can speculate all night about what might have happened, or what we individually think would have happened. But what did happen was that Luke's decision to go to Bespin and confront Vader resulted, eventually, in the downfall of the Emperor.

So with that in mind, I voted "No", Luke's decision wasn't wrong.

 

Yes, it was the wrong choice. He let his emotions cloud his judgment which is the crux of his (and Anakin's) journey as a Jedi. Rushed to save his friends on an almost suicidal mission when they were the ones who ended up saving him. He should have finished his training and face Vader when he was ready, like Yoda and Obi-Wan advised.

 

Facing Vader when he did gave experience and determination for the next time they would have to meet. Had he not gone to Bespin the conflict between them might have been more protracted and than their was the Han kidnapping which completely distracted Luke from his path. I say he had the right reasons for going to Bespin, his problem was underestimating Lord Vader and the Empire. I am a Jedi, watch me kick some Stormtroopers.

 

Thanks, that clears up some things.


Even though he made a mistake, the experience forced him to mature and figure it all out on his own. So it's not a complete loss.

 

Well said. One could view it as the will of the Force. Luke did learn not to let his emotions control him, and he learned how dangerous Vader could be. In the end, both Yoda and Luke had their points, as Anakinfan and you said, but Luke learned from his mistakes. It made him a stronger Jedi in the end.

 

Obi Wan Kenobi never had a chance to tell Luke Vader was his father seeing as he was killed by Vader. He probably also reasoned he would not make it out of the Death Star when he separated from Han and Luke. Luke was harsh on Obi for not telling him sooner but I can see it from his point of view also. You'd expect this to be first told when he spoke about Anakin being a great Jedi Knight. " I must tell you Luke that your father became involved with the Empire." and left it at that. No need to go to town on the nitty gritty details. A lit bit of foresight would have helped Luke. I'd say Obi Wan Kenobi figured that Anakin was part of his time and Luke's knowledge of the galaxy was so remote as to be a waste of time exchanging stories about old men fighting in long forgotten wars.

 

He wasn't ready. He wasn't disciplined enough, he wasn't skilled enough, and he was not yet fully mature enough to handle a confrontation with Vader. Obi-Wan and Yoda both knew that when Luke eventually confronted Vader that the truth might come out, and they wanted that confrontation to happen without the emotional baggage. Ironic, because in the end that emotional baggage is what saves Luke and in turn the entire Galaxy from the Sith.

 

Was it the wrong decision? Yes. He rushed into a battle he could not win. But it was a necessary thing to happen, so he could find out Vader is his father and grow from the experience

 

Anakin SkywalkerVader wrote

However, from Luke's perspective, and from a moral standpoint, was it wrong for Luke to go in attempt to save his friends?

You brought up the good classic question whether the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few.

I don't think he was wrong to do it and concur with the Greek philosopher (and advisor to Alexander the Great) Aristotle. Unfortunately I don't have access to his exact quote but it was along the lines of why to care for the greater good and people we have never met when those dearest to us suffer and need our help.

It's one of these classic moral dilemmas where regardless how you choose you still won't do the right thing.

I'd say it also depends on the context and the position you are in when to make that choice. For example, a president of the US should be committed to the greater good of the USA, that's what he has been elected for and that's what should determine his decision.

As for Luke it's really up to him whether it's his obligation to save the Alliance or his friends. But as I've already speculated elsewhere here, I think his first Obligation - from his personal point of view - is to his friends which ultimately determines his choice.

With Leia that's obviously different, considering that she was rather willing to sacrifice her home planet than the Alliance.
Clearly she felt that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the "few", although I'm certain she must have felt absolutely awful, considering her job was to represent (and protect) the people of Alderaan as an Imperial senator.

 

Reading this thread, I'm reminded of someone who probably would've understood Luke's reasoning very well...

Sarek: Kirk, I thank you. What you have done is...
Kirk: What I have done, I had to do.
Sarek: But at what cost? Your ship. Your son.
Kirk: If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul.

Spock: My father says that you have been my friend. You came back for me.
Kirk: You would have done the same for me.
Spock: Why would you do this?
Kirk: Because the needs of the one... outweigh the needs of the many.

 

I like but Jim Kirk and Jedi don't really come to mind at the same time. I think when you are betting the galaxy the prize has to be more than any handful of people and as such it can't be called a good idea.

Even Kirk only really put a beat up old ship and a bare minimum crew all who were into it as he was. David and Savik were already there and at considerable risk regardless.

It worked out but Luke really rolled the dice there, the most likely outcomes are much worse.

 

Agreed.